VakkariIRiX meeting 14.11.20071 Perceived influence of the use of electronic information resources...

Vakkari IRiX meeting 14.11.2007 1

Perceived influence ofthe use of electronic information resources on scholarly work and

publication productivity

Pertti Vakkari

University of Tampere

Finland


Background

• Substantial investments by governments for improving scholars’ access to electronic information resources

• Provision of electronic information resources increased

• Increased provision and improved access will increase the use of those resources and lead to growth in scholarly productivity?


Earlier studies

• Positive relationship between the number of papers published and the use of SCIENCEnet, a computer network for oceanographers, especially in benefit of junior researchers (Hesse & al. 1993)

• Positive relationship between internet use for IR and communication and research productivity in five disciplines within seven EU countries (Barjak 2006)


Research questions

• What is scholars’ opinion about the influence of the use of electronic resources on their work

• How is scholars’ opinion about the influence of e-resource use associated with their publication productivity


Data

• FinELib’s annual user survey via www-questionnaires in April 2007adressed to the staff and students of all 22 Finnish universities

• 767 faculty members and full time doctoral students responded

• The data is biased towards humanities, social sciences and natural sciences, and towards doctoral students


Independent variables

How has the use of e-resources affected your work on a scale from “considerably” to “not at all”:

• Made it easier to find the material I need in my work• Made it easier to get hold of the material I need in my work• Extended the range of the material I need in my work that is

available• Made it easier to keep up with developments in my own field• Improved the quality of my work (results)• Inspired new thinking/ideas• Reduced my working time• Reduced the amount of browsing of resources in libraries


Dependent variables

• Self-reported number of publications by type during two years preceding the poll– # of internationally published items– # of nationally published items– total # of items published


Controlled variables

• Academic status– full-time PhD student, assistant /

researcher, lecturer / teacher, professor

• Perceived availability of a field’s core resources in electronic format– a five-point scale

• Discipline– 18 disciplinary categories collapsed into five


Major disciplinary groups

Humanities Humanities, Art and Design, Music, Theology

Social Sciences

Social Sciences, Education, Psychology, Law, Economics

Natural Sciences

Natural sciences, Agriculture and Forestry

Engineering Engineering

Medicine Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Medicine, Pharmacy, Health Sciences, Physical Education


FinELib

• National electronic library run by the National Library of Finland for a consortium of (all) universities, polytechnics and research institutes

• Selects e-material, negotiates about the licence rights with publishers and provides access to material licenced

• Is the major supplier of e-literature to universities– Covered 84 % of acquisition of e-materials in 2004 at

Finnish universities


How has the use of electronic resources affected your work/study?

Dimensions of work Consider

ably

To some

extent

Not at all DonÕt

know

Total

Easier to find material 82 16 1 1 100

Easier to get hold of material 76 21 2 1 100

Extended the range of material 60 33 4 3 100

Easier to keep up to date 61 33 4 2 100

Improved the quality of work 38 44 6 12 100

Inspired new ideas 32 49 8 11 100

Saved working time 58 30 9 3 100

Reduced browsing in libraries 74 19 5 2 100

The distributions of responses on the influence of the use of e-resources on various dimensions of scholarly work (n=767) (%).


Perceived influence Factor 1 Factor 2

Easier to find material .399 .626

Easier to get hold of material .232 .736

Extended the range of material .588 .325

Easier to keep up to date .682 .272

Improved the quality of work .800 .194

Inspired new ideas .858 .015

Saved working time .159 .705

Reduced browsing in libraries .055 .740


Disciplinary differentiation

• Representatives of medicine and social sciences felt that the use of e-resources has a significantly greater positive influence on the content of their work compared to other disciplines

• Positive influence on access was greatest in medicine, followed by natural sciences, engineering and social sciences, humanists being the last influenced by the use of e-resourcs


Access to e-resources

# of publicat Total Internat National

All (767) .13*** .17*** -.06

Discipline

Human (149) .06 .09 -.02

Social (238) -.02 .06 -.09

Natural (193) .17* .14 .08

Engineer (99) .25* .19 .21*

Medicine (65) .18 .19 -.06

Spearman's rho coefficients between factor score s

of access to e -resources, and the number of various

types of publications.


# of publicat Total Internat National

All (767) .13*** .17*** -.06

PhD stud (253) .26*** .31*** -.04

Assistants (280) .01 .10 -.16**

Lecturers (119) .25** .19* .09

Professors (97) .01 .03 -.07

Spearman's rho coefficients between factor scores of access to e-resources, and the number of various types of publications.


Limitations of the study

• Subjective opinions, not objective measurement of the changes in scholars’ work– the distribution of opinions across influence

variables is plausible, greater in accessibility than in the quality of work

• Data biased towards humanities & social sciences and younger scholars

• Direction of causality– Differential effect benefiting younger scholars

speaks for the influence of the use of e-resources


Conclusions

• Influence of e-resource use on scholarly work consist of two dimensions– accessibility and the content of scholarly work

• Discipline has a differential effect on the dimensions of influence

• Improved access to e-resources has improved scholars’ work by helping keep up to date and by saving time (Brown&al. 2007)


Conclusions• The perceived improved access to e-resources

is positively associated with the number of international publications produced, among doctoral students in particular, but not among humanists

• The differential benefit for younger scholars is in line with the findings in Hesse & al 1993

• Younger scholars have less social and intellectual capital than more senior peers (Meadows 1998)– e-resources compensate this lack of capital


Conclusions

• The perceived influence of the use of e-resources on the content of scholarly work was not associated with publication productivity

• The results seem to imply that investments in academic digital libraries are beneficial for the researchers and for the universities in terms of increased publication productivity

VakkariIRiX meeting 14.11.20071 Perceived influence of the use of electronic information resources...

Documents

Transcript of VakkariIRiX meeting 14.11.20071 Perceived influence of the use of electronic information resources...